Substance overdose mortality in the United States claimed over 80,000 lives in 2023, with the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbating existing trends through healthcare disruptions and behavioral changes. Estimating excess mortality, defined as deaths beyond expected levels based on pre-pandemic patterns, is essential for understanding pandemic impacts and informing intervention strategies. However, traditional statistical methods like SARIMA assume linearity, stationarity, and fixed seasonality, which may not hold under structural disruptions. We present a systematic comparison of SARIMA against three deep learning (DL) architectures (LSTM, Seq2Seq, and Transformer) for counterfactual mortality estimation using national CDC data (2015-2019 for training/validation, 2020-2023 for projection). We contribute empirical evidence that LSTM achieves superior point estimation (17.08% MAPE vs. 23.88% for SARIMA) and better-calibrated uncertainty (68.8% vs. 47.9% prediction interval coverage) when projecting under regime change. We also demonstrate that attention-based models (Seq2Seq, Transformer) underperform due to overfitting to historical means rather than capturing emergent trends. Ourreproducible pipeline incorporates conformal prediction intervals and convergence analysis across 60+ trials per configuration, and we provide an open-source framework deployable with 15 state health departments. Our findings establish that carefully validated DL models can provide more reliable counterfactual estimates than traditional methods for public health planning, while highlighting the need for calibration techniques when deploying neural forecasting in high-stakes domains.
Yuzheng Xu, Annya Dahmani, Matthew D. Blanchard et al.
Human-AI complementarity, the idea that combining human and AI judgments can outperform either alone, offers a promising pathway toward robust oversight of advanced AI systems. However, whether human-AI complementarity can be achieved on realistic tasks remains an open question. We investigate this through two approaches: hybridization and two AI assistance methods (top-2 assistance and subtask delegation), evaluated on a multi-domain dataset of 1,886 samples spanning knowledge, factuality, long-context reasoning, and deception detection. We find only modest complementarity gains. Baseline hybridization yields just +0.4 percentage points (pp) over AI alone (69.3\% vs 68.9\%), limited both by a small complementarity region (only 8.9\% of items where AI errs but humans do not) and the inability of confidence-based routing to identify it, since the model's confidence is similarly distributed across correct and incorrect predictions. Applied when AI has low confidence, top-2 assistance increases human accuracy from 28.4\% to 38.3\%, surpassing AI alone (37.7\%) -- but primarily because humans adopt correct AI suggestions, not because they successfully override AI errors. These findings suggest that the primary bottleneck is not human task accuracy per se, but the ability to route decisions to humans when it matters and to design assistance methods that enable humans to catch AI mistakes. Our quantitative and qualitative analyses pinpoint where and why each method succeeds or fails, offering concrete targets for future work. We will release our dataset and code upon request to support progress toward more effective human-AI collaboration for AI oversight.
Steven Tsan, Raghav Kansal, Anthony Aportela et al.
Autoencoders have useful applications in high energy physics in anomaly detection, particularly for jets - collimated showers of particles produced in collisions such as those at the CERN Large Hadron Collider. We explore the use of graph-based autoencoders, which operate on jets in their "particle cloud" representations and can leverage the interdependencies among the particles within a jet, for such tasks. Additionally, we develop a differentiable approximation to the energy mover's distance via a graph neural network, which may subsequently be used as a reconstruction loss function for autoencoders.